i've seen Doom on tv last night.. holy crap it sucked in the same way of RES, Max Payne etc.
Maybe the only decent one i've seen is Silent Hill....
my question: why movies taken from games sucks so much?
i've seen Doom on tv last night.. holy crap it sucked in the same way of RES, Max Payne etc.
Maybe the only decent one i've seen is Silent Hill....
my question: why movies taken from games sucks so much?
Cuz AI sucks in these games and people must be dumb too, except Heroes, these are human players!
that's not an answer. For example Max Payne (the game) has a great plot and charisma, all the characters are very well explained in all their feelings. Max Payne the movie is like a bang bang boom boom one.. no story, no drama, no explainations.. anything!
Licensed games are horrible. But, he has a point, movies based on videogames are trash. Mostly.
The only ones I can think of, that are genuinely good, are Silent Hill and the first Resident Evil movie. There are other ones, though, that are So Bad It's Good: the first Mortal Kombat, the '94 Street Fighter, the second Resident Evil movie, and Advent Children.
Most are So Bad It's Horrible, though.
A lot of movies based on the plot of the game are terrible. Just like games based on the plot of the movie, which lately have come out coinciding the movie(think Ice Age, X-Men Origins, all that jazz). On the other hand, movies which create their own storyline in the same 'universe' can be good. Similarly, games which don't focus on following the course of the film can be good(think Star Wars as the most notable movie-game franchise).
The problem is game design and movie production are two entirely different things, so when either try to mimic the other it results in a whole lot of shite.
House of Ward ~ Patron of Eothese, Mythic_Commodore, Wundai, & Saint Nicholas
A new mobile phone tower went up in a town in the USA, and the local newspaper asked a number of people what they thought of it. Some said they noticed their cellphone reception was better. Some said they noticed the tower was affecting their health.
A local administrator was asked to comment. He nodded sagely, and said simply: "Wow. And think about how much more pronounced these effects will be once the tower is actually operational."
Max payne game was just very good.But the guy who played in the movie looked just emotionless.
That's what Mark Wahlberg calls acting.
People, just accept the fact that movies made from video games are at best mediocre but usually crap. There's probably several reasons for that. For one, producers wanting to cash in using a popular and established brand, which usually means making the least effort and the slapping a popular name on it.
Then the misconception that something that worked well as a game will automatically make a good movie.
Says the guy praising the game where the model had the same look on his face no matter what.
Max Payne, as a general rule, isn't a very emotional character. There are scenes that are an exception to this, but by and large, Max is just a Man on a Mission(TM), and to hell with emotion, life, and everything but the end goal. Ironically, this makes Wahlberg a very appropriate casting choice for the role.
Last edited by Gaidin; July 23, 2009 at 12:24 PM.
One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
Poppycock! Hollywood makes the games better by the movies. All Star Wars games suck compared to my original genius in the films, but I still let them get made, they make me money!
The answer is simple: b/c transferring the plot/characters/etc from one medium to another almost never works. Something gets lost in translation and it really is unavoidable. Also, movie makers are limited...let's use your example here of Max Payne...that game from start to finish took what? 5? 6? hours to complete yeah? Well, the movie can only really last about an hour...thus ALOT needs to be condensed, changed, added, or even totally thrown out...taking a lot of the experience players got from the game and totally changing it.
Plus, if you were to totally adapt a game for film it would probably be the most boring experience of your life - same going for movies to games. Games are all about interaction...movies are not.
Under the patronage of Pra
Addicted-Gamers.com - Up-and-coming game news website! Please support us!
He used to be hilarious.. but that was before the dark times..
Before the Empire.
Originally Posted by Hunter S. Thompson
Games based on movies is usually rushed in order to get sold when the hype of the movie is at it's maximum. It usually takes years for developers to create a good game, but movie licensed games is created in a matter of months --> 1 year. And they are usually sold before the movie even comes out. X-Men: Origins Wolverine is an exception, as it strayed from the movie plot and took it's own course + lots of blood + a REAL healing factor. Even IGN gave it a 7.9/10.
Why movies that are based on games suck is because Uwe Boll directed 90% of them.
August Strindberg: "There's a view, current at the moment even among quite sensible people, that women, that secondary form of humanity (second to men, the lords and shapers of human civilisation) should in some way become equal with men, or could so be; this is leading to a struggle which is both bizarre and doomed. It's bizarre because a secondary form, by the laws of science, is always going to be a secondary form. Imagine two people, A (a man) and B (a woman). They start to run a race from the same point, C. A (the man) has a speed of, let's say, 100; B (the woman) has a speed of 60. Now, the question is 'Can B ever overtake A?" and the answer is 'Never!'. Whatever training, encouragement or self-denial is applied, the proposition is as impossible as that two parallel lines should ever meet."